Jump to content
 

Got a new Camera


M Graff
 Share

Recommended Posts

Merry Christmas!

I got a new camera as a gift from my wife.

[:)]

I have used my old Sony DSC320 for several years, but it has starting to show its age...

The new one is a Sony DSC QX100:

upload_-1.jpg

It uses my smartphone as a display, and if I mount the lenz separately, I can be 30 feet away with the phone to control it. Very useful feature.

It is a very nice piece of hardware which will be very fun to use more.

Here is a test pic from this mornings "Julotta" (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julotta)

upload_-1.jpg

 

Anyone tried it for model photos?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

i have the older DSC-QX10 its quite good on the layout for usual angles but even more fun on a selfie stick out and about (not under ohle obviously)

 

4CA10D13-AC44-4F95-ADD3-01385C90A7B3.jpg

 

and on a tripod

0087D976-A280-4852-88B6-39B6EEC600B7.jpg

 

some of my remote pics taken on it

4FC8169F-40FD-4BC2-954C-665D8894D85A.jpg

 

B11D72D6-EBB1-4D7C-ABFC-C0DC2E399A8C.jpg

 

6823788A-54A0-4572-A738-B118EA56C94D.jpg

 

B241E852-9721-4D99-83D4-139167D1D063.jpg

 

the only downside is there can be a bit if a lag between pressing the shutter on the phone and the picture taking which with a moving train pic is a pain, other than that its a clever piece of kit

 

i think roundhouse has one too

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a brave choice for a novelty alternative to just using the mobile phone sensor on its own. The 1" sensor refers to a sensor the same size as used to be found in what used to be referred to as a 1" TV camera tube - still tiny and only about 13.2mm X 8.8mm I think. Reviews show its edge definition to be below photographic quality in terms of pixel density. At its normal selling price it would be hard to imagine any sales at all but I guess at £120 that compensates for its limitations. Were you to try one you would find a conventional micro 4/3 camera would easily outperform this Sony in terms of resolution, speed of use, and freedom from glitches like locking up on complex scenes.

Edited by ParkeNd
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a brave choice for a novelty alternative to just using the mobile phone sensor on its own. The 1" sensor refers to a sensor the same size as used to be found in what used to be referred to as a 1" TV camera tube - still tiny and only about 13.2mm X 8.8mm I think. Reviews show its edge definition to be below photographic quality in terms of pixel density. At its normal selling price it would be hard to imagine any sales at all but I guess at £120 that compensates for its limitations. Were you to try one you would find a conventional micro 4/3 camera would easily outperform this Sony in terms of resolution, speed of use, and freedom from glitches like locking up on complex scenes.

No, that's wrong...

I have used other cameras, and they are NOT better than this.

This gives the same quality pics as the (much more expensive) SONY RX100.

And the glitches?? Locking up?

Edited by M Graff
Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that's wrong...

I have used other cameras, and they are NOT better than this.

This gives the same quality pics as the (much more expensive) SONY RX100.

And the glitches?? Locking up?

It is a similar sensor to the RX100 but apparently not the same. The QX100 lens unit is also a JPEG only device and is not capable of RAW exposures unlike the RX100 which limits its resolution and throws away many pixels when it saves its files. Reviews shows it can lock up when presented with a complex image such as tree branches with twigs at the edge of a frame. Most reviews rate it at 2.5 stars out of 5 stars.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

i must admit i got mine for the novelty value but its still a good camera, i didn't buy it as a replacement my main camera and i wouldnt use it as a complete replacement, more of a compliment to it, and i use the iphone camera for quick shots while out and about anyway

 

ive not experienced mine locking up, an issue you can get is loss of wifi signal if you get too far away from the lens (which is a no brainer really)

 

i think i gave £90 used from CEX for my xq-10 about 18 months ago, 2nd hand they have dropped down to around the £70 mark in there now

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a similar sensor to the RX100 but apparently not the same. The QX100 lens unit is also a JPEG only device and is not capable of RAW exposures unlike the RX100 which limits its resolution and throws away many pixels when it saves its files. Reviews shows it can lock up when presented with a complex image such as tree branches with twigs at the edge of a frame. Most reviews rate it at 2.5 stars out of 5 stars.

The new firmware has made the early glitches a non issue according to M3 magazine.

And RAW? I can't edit RAW in my tablet anyway.

So that is also a non issue for me. It is rated 4 out of 5 by me, and that is what counts.

Besides, tbe ratings on newer reviews are in the 4 out of 5 range.

It is very suitable for the job I need it for.

Edit: the lag and lock up are almost all on iOs.

Edited by M Graff
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold

The firmware update definatly made it more stable than when i first got it, must check on the sony site if there are any futher ones as ive not done it for a good 12 months, the last one added a couple of extra features to do with the focusing

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The new firmware has made the early glitches a non issue according to M3 magazine.

And RAW? I can't edit RAW in my tablet anyway.

So that is also a non issue for me. It is rated 4 out of 5 by me, and that is what counts.

Besides, tbe ratings on newer reviews are in the 4 out of 5 range.

It is very suitable for the job I need it for.

Edit: the lag and lock up are almost all on iOs.

Why can you not edit RAW files on your tablet?

 

Photoshop Express is a free app with RAW processing ability. If you look at your photos you have both burned out highlights and heavily blocked shadow details in the same shots. RAW would enable you to recover detail in both rather than this detail being discarded by your JPEGs. A conventional Panasonic micro 4/3 compact with about 25mp and RAW may just surprise you - try this for instance. And this is just a 16mp Panasonic GX1X but shooting RAW and converted in Aperture 3. Usually I use a Nikon D810 but find micro 4/3 can really perform if you shoot RAW. Try to lose the JPEGs as soon as you can.

 

 

_1010836_zpsgvfxui25.jpg

Edited by ParkeNd
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you compare the results of no added light photo's taken without reflectors, with outside shots!?

Okay.... just to get a different opinion, as you seem to be very opinionated against anything that is outside the standard sphere, my friend who is a prize winning photographer saw my pics and said that:

1- the depth of field was very good, better than his SLR's ever could manage.

And 2- that the low light results were very much better than his digital Leica could manage.

So, show me your inside, no added light other than 2! 4 watt LEDs with better resolution or quality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you compare the results of no added light photo's taken without reflectors, with outside shots!?

Okay.... just to get a different opinion, as you seem to be very opinionated against anything that is outside the standard sphere, my friend who is a prize winning photographer saw my pics and said that:

1- the depth of field was very good, better than his SLR's ever could manage.

And 2- that the low light results were very much better than his digital Leica could manage.

So, show me your inside, no added light other than 2! 4 watt LEDs with better resolution or quality.

You can already compare your outside photos with a micro 4/3 outside photo.

 

I don't deliberately take photos with less than the best kit I have - unless there is a risk of it being taken off me and then I take the Panasonic.

 

Here is micro 4/3 in RAW taken inside in low light with absolutely no additional photographic lighting.

 

_1000301_zpsbrkzha8c.jpg

 

And picking up your point aimed at the inadequacy of DSLR's for layout photos. This is a DSLR shot from last week of part of my N gauge layout. Single flash bounced off the ceiling.

 

2015-12-06-13.02.38%20ZS%20DMap_zpsgmjxo

 

If only depth of field is your requirement then going to the smallest sensor you can find - like an iPhone - will meet this need - but with big limitations elsewhere.

 

This is my final post on the topic - and yes I am opinionated when there are facts and evidence to balance against claims - the £120 you spent on your Sony beats a camera phone and was not much money for any photographic device - but in terms of the absolutes you claim for it, your pictures are neither sharp nor well exposed in comparison with alternatives available at modest cost - but you do need to be open minded to reap the benefits.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Apologies for highjacking someone else's thread however, I too have a 'new toy'!! Just had a play with new camera and lenses and some resultas attached. Particularly pleased with 'low-level' shot of 9F - camera has a 'tilt viewfinder' so I can get low without having to kneel in the detritus of Ropley Yard!!

Andy

post-3043-0-84261500-1501174123_thumb.jpg

post-3043-0-17337100-1501174142_thumb.jpg

post-3043-0-49412000-1501174153_thumb.jpg

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...